Abstract
Objective This study aimed to develop and concurrently validate a simple, resource-efficient, and time-efficient bedside tool based on day-to-day movement tasks for evaluating upper limb function in stroke survivors.
Methods The study’s qualitative and cross-sectional component was conducted in 2 stages. At the initial stage, a relevant literature review was carried out to conceptualize and define the theoretical framework of day-to-day movement tasks, in evaluating upper limb function. Subsequently, an initial item pool of 18 upper limb and hand movements was developed. A Delphi method was employed to verify content validity of the initial 18-item scale using an expert consensus panel of 6 subject matter experts (three neurologists, two physiotherapists, and 1 occupation therapist). At the first round, 4 items were excluded using expert panel consensus method. During the second round of the content validation phase, the remaining 14-item scale was revised and refined to a final 12-item scale by the expert panel using a 5-point Likert rating scale. A score of 2 or below by at least two experts on a 5-point Likert scale was used as the criterion to modify or remove the components. During the second stage, the final 12-item bedside upper limb evaluation tool (BUFET) scale underwent concurrent validation using purposive sampling of 25 stroke survivors. Concurrent validity was assessed by correlating the BUFET score with Wolf Motor Function (WMT) scores using Spearman’s correlation coefficient and internal consistency was evaluated through Cronbach’s alpha.
Results Concurrent validity and internal consistency of the scale were supported by a high correlation coefficient (r = 0.937; p<0.001) with WMFT and high Cronbach’s alpha (0.948).
Conclusions The newly developed BUFET was found to be a valid and reliable bedside tool in the evaluation of upper limb functions and can be administered in a resource and time-efficient manner.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
The author(s) received no specific funding for this work.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Institutional Ethics Committee (IEC KMC MLR 1/2022/15) has approved the research project. Written consent was obtained from all the participants prior to the enrollement into study.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
DATA AVAILABILITY
The research data associated with this paper and the appendix contents are available from https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/UFHK5
